pool configuration directive on Windows - NTP

This is a discussion on pool configuration directive on Windows - NTP ; I've been updaing the ntpd on a few of my windows servers, and I thought I would start using the "pool" configuration directive instead of separate "server" lines. However, using ntp-4.2.4p4@1.1520-modena-o-win32 compiled by Mienberg, the "pool" configuration line seems to ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 30

Thread: pool configuration directive on Windows

  1. pool configuration directive on Windows

    I've been updaing the ntpd on a few of my windows servers, and I
    thought I would start using the "pool" configuration directive instead
    of separate "server" lines.

    However, using ntp-4.2.4p4@1.1520-modena-o-win32 compiled by Mienberg,
    the "pool" configuration line seems to be non-functional. Details
    below:

    C:\Program Files\NTP\bin>ntpq -p localhost
    remote refid st t when poll reach delay
    offset jitter
    ================================================== ============================
    *sammy.bai.org 192.77.171.2 2 u 23 64 77 0.266
    3.360 8.579
    server.bai.org 10.140.84.10 3 u 24 64 77 0.357
    -17.907 8.218
    ntpmaster1.sys. .GPS. 1 u 20 64 77 42.755
    -3.138 7.252

    And here is the ntp.conf :

    driftfile "C:\Program Files\NTP\etc\ntp.drift"
    #server 0.pool.ntp.org
    #server 1.pool.ntp.org
    #server 2.pool.ntp.org
    #server 3.pool.ntp.org
    server sammy.bai.org iburst
    server server.bai.org iburst
    server ntpmaster1.sys.cogentco.com
    pool pool.ntp.org

  2. Re: pool configuration directive on Windows

    Ryan,

    Ryan Malayter wrote:
    > I've been updaing the ntpd on a few of my windows servers, and I
    > thought I would start using the "pool" configuration directive instead
    > of separate "server" lines.
    >
    > However, using ntp-4.2.4p4@1.1520-modena-o-win32 compiled by Mienberg,
    > the "pool" configuration line seems to be non-functional. Details
    > below:

    [...]

    The keyword "pool" has been introduced in the development branch of NTP
    (ntp-dev, v4.2.5), so it is not supported in ntpd v4.2.4p4 which is the
    current "stable" version.

    Martin
    --
    Martin Burnicki

    Meinberg Funkuhren
    Bad Pyrmont
    Germany

  3. Re: pool configuration directive on Windows

    On Mar 4, 10:29*am, Martin Burnicki
    wrote:
    > The keyword "pool" has been introduced in the development branch of NTP
    > (ntp-dev, v4.2.5), so it is not supported in ntpd v4.2.4p4 which is the
    > current "stable" version.


    Ahh... it is on Dave's udel documentation page, so I figred this
    feature was "released". While it is not practical to go back in
    history, it might be nice to have footnotes that relate specific
    functionailty changes to specific versions in the documentation.

    The page I am talking about is http://www.cis.udel.edu/~mills/ntp/html/manyopt.html.
    A footnote that says "introduced in version 4.2.5" for the pool scheme
    would be helpful. I guess you can comb the release notes, but working
    backwards that way is much more difficult for the end user.

  4. Re: pool configuration directive on Windows

    Ryan Malayter wrote:

    > Martin Burnicki wrote:
    >
    >> The keyword "pool" has been introduced in the development branch of
    >> NTP (ntp-dev, v4.2.5), so it is not supported in ntpd v4.2.4p4 which
    >> is the current "stable" version.

    >
    > Ahh... it is on Dave's udel documentation page, so I figred this
    > feature was "released".


    The documentation at
    http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/ntp/html/index.html applies to the
    current development release.

    If you wish to refer to the documentation for any arbitrary release
    (other than the current development snapshot) you will find it in the
    ../html directory of the tarball for that version of the distribution.

    --
    Steve Kostecke
    NTP Public Services Project - http://support.ntp.org/

  5. Re: pool configuration directive on Windows

    Steve Kostecke wrote:

    >
    > If you wish to refer to the documentation for any arbitrary release
    > (other than the current development snapshot) you will find it in the
    > ./html directory of the tarball for that version of the distribution.
    >


    In my view that is wrong; the documentation that is easy to find should
    be that for the current release (stable) version.

  6. Re: pool configuration directive on Windows

    On Mar 4, 5:33*pm, David Woolley
    wrote:
    > In my view that is wrong; the documentation that is easy to find should
    > be that for the current release (stable) version.


    Agreed. Athough maintaining multiple versions of the docs online would
    be most ideal, the way that PostGreSQL does it.

    Example:
    http://www.postgresql.org/docs/

    Any reasonable version control system or web content management system
    would make this a snap (as well as enabling error correction to be
    merged back into older versions of the documentation).

  7. Re: pool configuration directive on Windows

    Dave only publishes the latest code and the latest docs.

    These are available from his UDel links.

    Anything else comes from ntp.org, which is supported by volunteers and the
    NTP Forum.

    I appreciate knowing what is important to people.

    If it is important to *you* to get some of these features, please volunteer
    and/or join the NTP Forum and/or help get companies to join the NTP Forum as
    institutional members, because otherwise these features may never be
    implemented.
    --
    Harlan Stenn
    http://ntpforum.isc.org - be a member!

  8. Re: pool configuration directive on Windows

    Ryan Malayter wrote:
    > On Mar 4, 10:29*am, Martin Burnicki
    > wrote:
    >> The keyword "pool" has been introduced in the development branch of NTP
    >> (ntp-dev, v4.2.5), so it is not supported in ntpd v4.2.4p4 which is the
    >> current "stable" version.

    >
    > Ahh... it is on Dave's udel documentation page, so I figred this
    > feature was "released". While it is not practical to go back in
    > history, it might be nice to have footnotes that relate specific
    > functionailty changes to specific versions in the documentation.
    >
    > The page I am talking about is
    > http://www.cis.udel.edu/~mills/ntp/html/manyopt.html. A footnote that says
    > "introduced in version 4.2.5" for the pool scheme would be helpful. I
    > guess you can comb the release notes, but working backwards that way is
    > much more difficult for the end user.


    I absolutely agree.

    The online docs are often quoted here in the NG, and sometimes certain
    features which have just been added a few ntp-dev versions ago are referred
    to in a way as if they had always been in the code, though they are not
    even in the current stable release. For example see the recent discussion
    about the handling of leap seconds.

    I'd really love to see some notes in the docs in which version certain
    features have been introduced, obsoleted, or even the effect has been
    inverted (e.g. the "restrict" keyword).

    Martin
    --
    Martin Burnicki

    Meinberg Funkuhren
    Bad Pyrmont
    Germany

  9. Re: pool configuration directive on Windows

    On Mar 4, 10:09*pm, Harlan Stenn wrote:
    > If it is important to *you* to get some of these features, please volunteer
    > and/or join the NTP Forum and/or help get companies to join the NTP Forum as
    > institutional members, because otherwise these features may never be
    > implemented.


    I have already provided some infrastructure support to the pool
    project, and contributed to the Wiki. So I suppose I would volunteer
    to help organize the official documentation, although I (perhaps
    incorrectly) inferred such things were jealously guarded by Dr. Mills
    with legions of ninja attack monkeys. After all, we don't have an
    NTPv4 RFC yet because of formatting disagreements.

    I assume a solid history of the documentation for each version is
    there? Besides the wiki, what sort of web CMS exists for the main site?

  10. Re: pool configuration directive on Windows

    Ryan,

    If you are using the NTP web documentation, you should read the home
    page where it states the relationship between the web documentation and
    the development branch on one hand and previous versions on the other.
    As always, please use the documentation that comes with your particular
    version. On the other hand, if you want the candy, visit the candy store.

    Dave

    Ryan Malayter wrote:
    > On Mar 4, 10:29 am, Martin Burnicki
    > wrote:
    >
    >>The keyword "pool" has been introduced in the development branch of NTP
    >>(ntp-dev, v4.2.5), so it is not supported in ntpd v4.2.4p4 which is the
    >>current "stable" version.

    >
    >
    > Ahh... it is on Dave's udel documentation page, so I figred this
    > feature was "released". While it is not practical to go back in
    > history, it might be nice to have footnotes that relate specific
    > functionailty changes to specific versions in the documentation.
    >
    > The page I am talking about is http://www.cis.udel.edu/~mills/ntp/html/manyopt.html.
    > A footnote that says "introduced in version 4.2.5" for the pool scheme
    > would be helpful. I guess you can comb the release notes, but working
    > backwards that way is much more difficult for the end user.


  11. Re: pool configuration directive on Windows

    David,

    I would be happy to make the documentation harder to find. I don't
    maintain the home page, but wordsmithing about four words would remove
    any ambiguity and clearly state that the documentation for each version
    is contained in that version. In any case, what documentation that comes
    from me, evil as it is, will always be for the development branch.

    Dave

    David Woolley wrote:

    > Steve Kostecke wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> If you wish to refer to the documentation for any arbitrary release
    >> (other than the current development snapshot) you will find it in the
    >> ./html directory of the tarball for that version of the distribution.
    >>

    >
    > In my view that is wrong; the documentation that is easy to find should
    > be that for the current release (stable) version.


  12. Re: pool configuration directive on Windows

    Martin,

    1. The pool command has been present for, in the scheme of things, for
    some time, certainly before the latest release in September, 2007. If
    so, why are we having this discussion?

    2. To what are you referring to about inverted restrict bits? I've heard
    this urban legend before from several sources. The only change some time
    ago was to the notrust bit. The interpretation was changed to deny
    access --unless-- the server was correctly authenticated to the client.
    Nothing was "inverted". You could help be spreading a new urban legend
    to this effect.

    3. I have been rather studious in announcing new features and
    significatn changes to the hackers newsgroup. The archives of that group
    should form an adequate electric paper trail, but it would have to be
    correlated with the release dates.

    4. There has been a serious upgrade effor for the documentation to
    improve the style, reduce the lies and correct misconceptions, but it is
    an ongoing effort. Much of that has already been incorporated in the
    development branch documentaiton, including a sitemap anc command index.
    However, I do not intend to create a back index documenting when changes
    have been introduced other that the rather vague release notes.

    Dave

    Martin Burnicki wrote:

    > Ryan Malayter wrote:
    >
    >>On Mar 4, 10:29 am, Martin Burnicki
    >>wrote:
    >>
    >>>The keyword "pool" has been introduced in the development branch of NTP
    >>>(ntp-dev, v4.2.5), so it is not supported in ntpd v4.2.4p4 which is the
    >>>current "stable" version.

    >>
    >>Ahh... it is on Dave's udel documentation page, so I figred this
    >>feature was "released". While it is not practical to go back in
    >>history, it might be nice to have footnotes that relate specific
    >>functionailty changes to specific versions in the documentation.
    >>
    >>The page I am talking about is
    >>http://www.cis.udel.edu/~mills/ntp/html/manyopt.html. A footnote that says
    >>"introduced in version 4.2.5" for the pool scheme would be helpful. I
    >>guess you can comb the release notes, but working backwards that way is
    >>much more difficult for the end user.

    >
    >
    > I absolutely agree.
    >
    > The online docs are often quoted here in the NG, and sometimes certain
    > features which have just been added a few ntp-dev versions ago are referred
    > to in a way as if they had always been in the code, though they are not
    > even in the current stable release. For example see the recent discussion
    > about the handling of leap seconds.
    >
    > I'd really love to see some notes in the docs in which version certain
    > features have been introduced, obsoleted, or even the effect has been
    > inverted (e.g. the "restrict" keyword).
    >
    > Martin


  13. Re: pool configuration directive on Windows

    Ryan,

    NOt so much jealously guarded, but of necessity. My eyesight has
    seriously degraded and I need special editors and tools. I have serious
    difficulty dealing with the eye-unfriendly Bugzilla contraption and even
    our own University pages. The NTP web guys have done a wonderful job
    of making the NTP web eye-friendly, but the documentation update process
    using conventtional bug managment tools is simply not tenable.

    Dave

    Ryan Malayter wrote:

    > On Mar 4, 10:09 pm, Harlan Stenn wrote:
    >
    >>If it is important to *you* to get some of these features, please volunteer
    >>and/or join the NTP Forum and/or help get companies to join the NTP Forum as
    >>institutional members, because otherwise these features may never be
    >>implemented.

    >
    >
    > I have already provided some infrastructure support to the pool
    > project, and contributed to the Wiki. So I suppose I would volunteer
    > to help organize the official documentation, although I (perhaps
    > incorrectly) inferred such things were jealously guarded by Dr. Mills
    > with legions of ninja attack monkeys. After all, we don't have an
    > NTPv4 RFC yet because of formatting disagreements.
    >
    > I assume a solid history of the documentation for each version is
    > there? Besides the wiki, what sort of web CMS exists for the main site?


  14. Re: pool configuration directive on Windows

    Dave,

    David L. Mills wrote:
    > Martin,
    >
    > 1. The pool command has been present for, in the scheme of things, for
    > some time, certainly before the latest release in September, 2007. If
    > so, why are we having this discussion?


    The release date of v4.2.4 was 2006-12-28, and the current point release
    v4.2.4p4 (the current -stable version) was published 2007-09-10.

    AFAIK only bug fixes have made their way into -stable after v4.2.4, but no
    new features like the "pool" command.

    Just grepping over the sources of both -dev and -stable shows that the word
    "pool" does not appear in the -stable branch, except in the contect of
    memory pools.

    In ntp-dev the word "pool" is listed as a keyword in ntp_config.c.

    > 2. To what are you referring to about inverted restrict bits? I've heard
    > this urban legend before from several sources. The only change some time
    > ago was to the notrust bit. The interpretation was changed to deny
    > access --unless-- the server was correctly authenticated to the client.
    > Nothing was "inverted". You could help be spreading a new urban legend
    > to this effect.


    Yes, in fact I've been referring to the notrust bit:
    http://support.ntp.org/bin/view/Supp...ection_6.5.3.1.

    For a similar case see Ronan Flood's recent post (2008-02-26) under the
    thread "NTPD on bond0:0":
    "The sense of -L was reversed in ntpd 4.2.0: before that version, it meant
    listen to virtual IPs, after that version, it means do not listen to them."

    > 3. I have been rather studious in announcing new features and
    > significatn changes to the hackers newsgroup. The archives of that group
    > should form an adequate electric paper trail, but it would have to be
    > correlated with the release dates.


    The problem here is when a "normal" NTP user tries to find whether a bug has
    already heen fixed in a certain version, or whether a feature is already
    available in a certain version, it's hard for him to find out.

    So for example the word "pool" can be found neither in the Changelog file of
    ntp-dev, nor in the commit logs of ntp-dev's BK repo, so it's hard to find
    when or in which version the "pool" feature has been introduced.

    Members of the hackers list may search their local mail archives when the
    "pool" keyword has been mentioned, then they have to determine whether the
    involved developers just started to discuss how to implement it, or when
    they finished to implement it.

    For people who are not on the hackers list and thus don't have local copies
    of the mails this is hard to do. Did you ever try to find a specific topic
    in the mailing list archives:
    https://lists.ntp.org/pipermail/hackers/
    You can review everything by date, thread, or download archives, but you can
    not search the archive for a keyword.
    (Steve or Brad, would it be possible to implement this?)

    Once a user has happened to find a specific email which documents when a
    feature has been added, they have to compare the date of that email to the
    dates when specific versions or tarballs have been release. Unfortunatey
    those dates are not even in the changelog files which come with the
    tarballs / distributions (I've recently suggested to Harlan to include
    those dates in the changelog).

    So they once again they have to search the mailing list or news group
    archives to find a mail or posting with the date when a specific version
    has been released.

    > 4. There has been a serious upgrade effor for the documentation to
    > improve the style, reduce the lies and correct misconceptions, but it is
    > an ongoing effort. Much of that has already been incorporated in the
    > development branch documentaiton, including a sitemap anc command index.
    > However, I do not intend to create a back index documenting when changes
    > have been introduced other that the rather vague release notes.


    I think this is OK as long as it's made clear that this documentation refers
    only to the current development code.

    Anyway, I'd appreciate enhancements of the changelogs to simplify
    investigations whether a specific feature is available in a specific
    version of the NTP package.

    Martin
    --
    Martin Burnicki

    Meinberg Funkuhren
    Bad Pyrmont
    Germany

  15. Re: pool configuration directive on Windows

    Martin,

    Things are very much worse than I thought. My understanding was that the
    release version was divorced from the development version periodically
    so the two at one time would be coincident and no release version would
    occur until the next divorce. It makes no sense and is a waste of
    resources to maintain two historic tracks well over a year divorced and
    separately updated. Now the trackers have to know (a) when the latest
    divorce occured, (b) when the latest release was carved and (c) what's
    in the development branch.

    Dave

    Martin Burnicki wrote:
    > Dave,
    >
    > David L. Mills wrote:
    >
    >>Martin,
    >>
    >>1. The pool command has been present for, in the scheme of things, for
    >>some time, certainly before the latest release in September, 2007. If
    >>so, why are we having this discussion?

    >
    >
    > The release date of v4.2.4 was 2006-12-28, and the current point release
    > v4.2.4p4 (the current -stable version) was published 2007-09-10.
    >
    > AFAIK only bug fixes have made their way into -stable after v4.2.4, but no
    > new features like the "pool" command.
    >
    > Just grepping over the sources of both -dev and -stable shows that the word
    > "pool" does not appear in the -stable branch, except in the contect of
    > memory pools.
    >
    > In ntp-dev the word "pool" is listed as a keyword in ntp_config.c.
    >
    >
    >>2. To what are you referring to about inverted restrict bits? I've heard
    >>this urban legend before from several sources. The only change some time
    >>ago was to the notrust bit. The interpretation was changed to deny
    >>access --unless-- the server was correctly authenticated to the client.
    >>Nothing was "inverted". You could help be spreading a new urban legend
    >>to this effect.

    >
    >
    > Yes, in fact I've been referring to the notrust bit:
    > http://support.ntp.org/bin/view/Supp...ection_6.5.3.1.
    >
    > For a similar case see Ronan Flood's recent post (2008-02-26) under the
    > thread "NTPD on bond0:0":
    > "The sense of -L was reversed in ntpd 4.2.0: before that version, it meant
    > listen to virtual IPs, after that version, it means do not listen to them."
    >
    >
    >>3. I have been rather studious in announcing new features and
    >>significatn changes to the hackers newsgroup. The archives of that group
    >>should form an adequate electric paper trail, but it would have to be
    >>correlated with the release dates.

    >
    >
    > The problem here is when a "normal" NTP user tries to find whether a bug has
    > already heen fixed in a certain version, or whether a feature is already
    > available in a certain version, it's hard for him to find out.
    >
    > So for example the word "pool" can be found neither in the Changelog file of
    > ntp-dev, nor in the commit logs of ntp-dev's BK repo, so it's hard to find
    > when or in which version the "pool" feature has been introduced.
    >
    > Members of the hackers list may search their local mail archives when the
    > "pool" keyword has been mentioned, then they have to determine whether the
    > involved developers just started to discuss how to implement it, or when
    > they finished to implement it.
    >
    > For people who are not on the hackers list and thus don't have local copies
    > of the mails this is hard to do. Did you ever try to find a specific topic
    > in the mailing list archives:
    > https://lists.ntp.org/pipermail/hackers/
    > You can review everything by date, thread, or download archives, but you can
    > not search the archive for a keyword.
    > (Steve or Brad, would it be possible to implement this?)
    >
    > Once a user has happened to find a specific email which documents when a
    > feature has been added, they have to compare the date of that email to the
    > dates when specific versions or tarballs have been release. Unfortunatey
    > those dates are not even in the changelog files which come with the
    > tarballs / distributions (I've recently suggested to Harlan to include
    > those dates in the changelog).
    >
    > So they once again they have to search the mailing list or news group
    > archives to find a mail or posting with the date when a specific version
    > has been released.
    >
    >
    >>4. There has been a serious upgrade effor for the documentation to
    >>improve the style, reduce the lies and correct misconceptions, but it is
    >>an ongoing effort. Much of that has already been incorporated in the
    >>development branch documentaiton, including a sitemap anc command index.
    >>However, I do not intend to create a back index documenting when changes
    >>have been introduced other that the rather vague release notes.

    >
    >
    > I think this is OK as long as it's made clear that this documentation refers
    > only to the current development code.
    >
    > Anyway, I'd appreciate enhancements of the changelogs to simplify
    > investigations whether a specific feature is available in a specific
    > version of the NTP package.
    >
    > Martin


  16. Re: pool configuration directive on Windows

    On Mar 6, 6:13*am, Martin Burnicki
    wrote:
    > You can review everything by date, thread, or download archives, but you can
    > not search the archive for a keyword.
    > (Steve or Brad, would it be possible to implement this?)


    Google has already implemented it:
    http://www.google.com/search?q=pool+...l%2Fhackers%2F

    And Microsoft says "Me Too!":
    http://search.live.com/results.aspx?...arch&form=QBRE

  17. Re: pool configuration directive on Windows

    On Mar 5, 10:11*pm, "David L. Mills" wrote:
    > If you are using the NTP web documentation, you should read the home
    > page where it states the relationship between the web documentation and
    > the development branch on one hand and previous versions on the other.
    > As always, please use the documentation that comes with your particular
    > version. On the other hand, if you want the candy, visit the candy store.


    Point taken. Search engines as well as posts in this forum always seem
    to give deep links into the documentation, so I don't think I've ever
    actually read that first page!

    I first started using ntpd in the late 1990s. Like most technical
    folk, I did not RTFM from its beginng, but rather hacked away and
    hopped about the (online)documentation for hints when I got stuck.

  18. Re: pool configuration directive on Windows

    >>> In article , "David L. Mills" writes:

    David> Martin, Things are very much worse than I thought. My understanding
    David> was that the release version was divorced from the development
    David> version periodically so the two at one time would be coincident and
    David> no release version would occur until the next divorce.

    This is what happens.

    And if a "significant" bug is found in -stable I make a "patch" release and
    fix it, generally because it will be "too long" to wait for the next time
    -dev is release as -stable and the divorce cycle starts again.

    David> It makes no sense and is a waste of resources to maintain two
    David> historic tracks well over a year divorced and separately updated.

    You don't have the full picture. The way it works now is minimal effort and
    is quite effective.

    It is a most workable and efficient solution, which nicely handles your
    stated position that you, Dave, will *only* work on -dev.

    David> Now the trackers have to know (a) when the latest divorce occured,
    David> (b) when the latest release was carved and (c) what's in the
    David> development branch.

    I'm not sure I follow or agree with what you say here, but all of the
    changes are listed in the ChangeLog, and they are quite easy to locate and
    identify.

    The most difficult problem is that you (Dave) often make changes where I
    cannot easily create ChangeLog notes. You sometimes describe your changes
    in an email message to hackers@, but that doesn't make it any easier for me
    to get these changes into the ChangeLog file.

    Given your desire to have the revision control system be completely
    invisible to you, at the moment the status quo is the best solution we
    have.

    Martin has already given me some suggestions on how to improve this, and I
    will be following his ideas.

    I'm happy to get other ideas on how to improve this as well.
    --
    Harlan Stenn
    http://ntpforum.isc.org - be a member!

  19. Re: pool configuration directive on Windows

    Martin Burnicki wrote:
    > Dave,
    >
    > David L. Mills wrote:
    >> Martin,
    >>
    >> 1. The pool command has been present for, in the scheme of things, for
    >> some time, certainly before the latest release in September, 2007. If
    >> so, why are we having this discussion?

    >
    > The release date of v4.2.4 was 2006-12-28, and the current point release
    > v4.2.4p4 (the current -stable version) was published 2007-09-10.
    >
    > AFAIK only bug fixes have made their way into -stable after v4.2.4, but no
    > new features like the "pool" command.
    >
    > Just grepping over the sources of both -dev and -stable shows that the word
    > "pool" does not appear in the -stable branch, except in the contect of
    > memory pools.
    >
    > In ntp-dev the word "pool" is listed as a keyword in ntp_config.c.
    >
    >> 2. To what are you referring to about inverted restrict bits? I've heard
    >> this urban legend before from several sources. The only change some time
    >> ago was to the notrust bit. The interpretation was changed to deny
    >> access --unless-- the server was correctly authenticated to the client.
    >> Nothing was "inverted". You could help be spreading a new urban legend
    >> to this effect.

    >
    > Yes, in fact I've been referring to the notrust bit:
    > http://support.ntp.org/bin/view/Supp...ection_6.5.3.1.
    >
    > For a similar case see Ronan Flood's recent post (2008-02-26) under the
    > thread "NTPD on bond0:0":
    > "The sense of -L was reversed in ntpd 4.2.0: before that version, it meant
    > listen to virtual IPs, after that version, it means do not listen to them."
    >
    >> 3. I have been rather studious in announcing new features and
    >> significatn changes to the hackers newsgroup. The archives of that group
    >> should form an adequate electric paper trail, but it would have to be
    >> correlated with the release dates.

    >
    > The problem here is when a "normal" NTP user tries to find whether a bug has
    > already heen fixed in a certain version, or whether a feature is already
    > available in a certain version, it's hard for him to find out.
    >
    > So for example the word "pool" can be found neither in the Changelog file of
    > ntp-dev, nor in the commit logs of ntp-dev's BK repo, so it's hard to find
    > when or in which version the "pool" feature has been introduced.
    >
    > Members of the hackers list may search their local mail archives when the
    > "pool" keyword has been mentioned, then they have to determine whether the
    > involved developers just started to discuss how to implement it, or when
    > they finished to implement it.
    >
    > For people who are not on the hackers list and thus don't have local copies
    > of the mails this is hard to do. Did you ever try to find a specific topic
    > in the mailing list archives:
    > https://lists.ntp.org/pipermail/hackers/
    > You can review everything by date, thread, or download archives, but you can
    > not search the archive for a keyword.
    > (Steve or Brad, would it be possible to implement this?)
    >
    > Once a user has happened to find a specific email which documents when a
    > feature has been added, they have to compare the date of that email to the
    > dates when specific versions or tarballs have been release. Unfortunatey
    > those dates are not even in the changelog files which come with the
    > tarballs / distributions (I've recently suggested to Harlan to include
    > those dates in the changelog).
    >
    > So they once again they have to search the mailing list or news group
    > archives to find a mail or posting with the date when a specific version
    > has been released.
    >
    >> 4. There has been a serious upgrade effor for the documentation to
    >> improve the style, reduce the lies and correct misconceptions, but it is
    >> an ongoing effort. Much of that has already been incorporated in the
    >> development branch documentaiton, including a sitemap anc command index.
    >> However, I do not intend to create a back index documenting when changes
    >> have been introduced other that the rather vague release notes.

    >
    > I think this is OK as long as it's made clear that this documentation refers
    > only to the current development code.
    >
    > Anyway, I'd appreciate enhancements of the changelogs to simplify
    > investigations whether a specific feature is available in a specific
    > version of the NTP package.
    >
    > Martin


    Martin,

    The real problem here is that as long as this is a volunteer effort it's
    hard to get someone to keep track of when a new feature is introduced or
    a bug is fixed apart from what we are doing in the Changelog. As you
    know the -stable release only changes with bug fixes and no new
    enhancements are introduced there unless the minor rev is bumped. The
    best that can be done right now is to include in Changelog whenever a
    new feature is introduced.

    Danny

  20. Re: pool configuration directive on Windows

    Danny,

    Danny Mayer wrote:
    > The real problem here is that as long as this is a volunteer effort it's
    > hard to get someone to keep track of when a new feature is introduced or
    > a bug is fixed apart from what we are doing in the Changelog.


    Right. The volunteers are doing a great job which is really appreciated.

    > As you
    > know the -stable release only changes with bug fixes and no new
    > enhancements are introduced there unless the minor rev is bumped. The
    > best that can be done right now is to include in Changelog whenever a
    > new feature is introduced.


    Right again, and basically this is a good thing. However it's even hard for
    people who are loosely involved in the development to keep track of when /
    in which version new features become available, and it's even much harder
    for those who are "just" users of NTP.

    So there's still room for improvements.

    Martin
    --
    Martin Burnicki

    Meinberg Funkuhren
    Bad Pyrmont
    Germany

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast